A notice to my readers: my previous column was incomplete as published in the Idaho State Journal.

I have the feeling that a good many Idahoans who are of a liberal political persuasion are, during the first few months of every year, taken aback by newspaper reports of legislative initiatives that are patently ridiculous. I can almost hear the muttered comments (“You can’t be serious!” “Only in Idaho….”) followed by exasperated sighs of resignation. My own inclination, since I’m reluctant to conclude that a great many of our chosen representatives are simply incompetent, is to assume that Idaho legislators are often not actually serious about these proposals; they are merely trying to reassure their constituents that they are the loyal conservatives they say they are, dedicated to whatever ultra-right cause is in vogue, and working hard during the legislative session to solve Idaho’s problems.

I bring this up because of a recent Idaho State Journal news story concerning a particular Idaho senator’s proposal. It was not a proposal for legislation, but for a change in the state’s constitution. Scott Herndon, from Sagle, Idaho (Bonnor County) recommended an amendment to the education section of our constitution. He wished to add text stating that a parent, custodial parent or guardian of a child “shall have the fundamental right to privately home educate such child or to cause such child to be privately educated” and, in doing so, that parent “shall be free from government regulation of such education.”

So, is Herndon serious about this, or just showing off his right-wing credentials? I suspect, in this case, it’s both.

Like all other states, Idaho has a basic compulsory education requirement that requires all children between the ages of 7 and 16 to receive some sort of education. Homeschooling is an allowed option, and Idaho has virtually no regulations regarding how that homeschooling should be conducted. Homeschool teachers are not required to possess any particular qualifications and may utilize whatever means of education they choose. Parents do not need permission to homeschool, and there are no requirements as to subjects to be taught; Idaho merely suggests that homeschoolers take note of subjects commonly covered in public schools. No testing of homeschool students’ progress is mandated.

What conclusion can we draw about Herndon’s proposed text? Basically, that it is unnecessary. The present Constitution makes it perfectly clear that Idaho wants no regulation of homeschooling. A “right” may not be mentioned, but it is implied simply by the inclusion of homeschooling as a legal option. Is something else needed here in addition to the absence of regulations? With no existing regulations to eliminate, Herndon could only offer a pretentious pronouncement that Idaho homeschoolers “shall be free” from such regulations, even though he knows that Idahoans could add a regulation whenever they thought it was needed.

All the same, I don’t mean to suggest that Herndon’s proposal is insincere. He, and many other arch-conservatives, regularly accuse governments of infringing upon individual rights. It’s as though the MAGA multitude, obsessed with their gradual decline in status in a changed America, cling desperately to the rights and authority that they believe they still possess. They are especially vehement about parental rights.

Committed MAGA Republicans have also come to distrust public schools. They believe that public schools are infected with modern-day thinking and spread the lies and immoral attitudes that have turned America into an irreligious and sinful country. One way they now try to combat that infection is to force schools to revise their textbooks, refrain from dealing with certain topics, and rid school libraries of what conservatives believe to be lewd and age-inappropriate books.

Another way, of course, is to avoid public schools altogether and educate children in the home. There they will be taught only what their parents think they should be taught. Conservatives regard homeschooling as an exercise of a parental right to shape a child’s character in accordance with their own beliefs and moral convictions. That right — to “raise your children as you see fit” — must, they insist, be vigilantly protected from governmental interference, because “big-government” always seeks to have its own way.

This conservative fixation on the infringement of parental rights means that Herndon is echoing a commonly-known complaint, and probably is quite sincere in proposing his rewrite.

But it’s also the case that Herndon wants to be seen as a staunch right-winger. He’s a “born-again” Christian, with eight children; he’s anti-abortion (with no exceptions for rape and incest), he opposes same-sex marriage, and he’s anti-gun-control. Some of the legislative proposals he’s made and supported since he became a senator in 2022, advertise his conservatism. He’s backed proposals to eliminate abortion exemptions, to stop sex trafficking, and to force transgender people to use bathrooms appropriate for their birth sex. Still, reminding his constituents of his right-wing credentials is always a desirable thing to do, and the homeschooling proposal got him front-page coverage in the ISJ.

A final note: I feel obligated to acknowledge that I, like Senator Herndon, believe that the education section of Idaho’s constitution needs revision. I call to your attention the fact that America’s long-standing commitment to free and compulsory education through grade 12 is grounded in the conviction that not only does our democracy benefit from the presence of an educated citizenry, but those who receive a decent education have been furnished with marketable knowledge and skills as well as the capacity to live a fuller, richer life.

It follows, I’d argue, that a country that believes in the benefits of compulsory education also believes that children in that country have a right to receive a decent education.

Childrens’ rights, I notice, are not much talked about by conservatives, however much they dwell on the sanctity of their parental rights. Idaho, as well, seems uninterested in honoring a child’s right to receive an adequate education. Homeschooling parents may well be incapable of providing that education, whether through ignorance, negligence, incompetence or intent, yet Idaho makes no effort to find out if a homeschooled child is learning as it should. Surely our constitution should require periodic testing of homeschooled children to gauge their educational progress. And surely, if a homeschooled child is being cheated of a satisfactory education, the state should intervene. A parent’s right to rule over his or her family cannot be allowed to nullify a child’s right to learn.